Slow Android Release
- Thread starter Eri_cx
- Start date
I'm not trying to defend Samsung (I absolutely HATE the slow update schedule on the tablets) but the recent "release" was in no way a beta release. XDA somehow got their hands on an early internal build.
Gayle Lynn
Well-known member
- Jun 20, 2016
- 1,780
- 0
- 0
Sounds exciting Alpha not beta. Doesn't qualify as DP -
"What we have isn’t going to be the same software build that Google will release as the first Android Q Developer Preview"
https://www.xda-developers.com/android-q-dark-theme-desktop-mode-permission-revamp/
Google has two years for developers and Android R to be 64-bit only. Also figuring out how to work with new library structure.
"What we have isn’t going to be the same software build that Google will release as the first Android Q Developer Preview"
https://www.xda-developers.com/android-q-dark-theme-desktop-mode-permission-revamp/
Google has two years for developers and Android R to be 64-bit only. Also figuring out how to work with new library structure.
Last edited:
Welcome to having a Samsung. There is a trade-off. We get the awesome screens, the design, the aod, and a load of other great hardware aspects. The trade-off is the slower updates. It's a trade-off I accept, I wont be able to pick Google until they up their hardware game quite substantially.
ZOMMBIE1
Trusted Member
- May 24, 2015
- 786
- 1
- 0
I would still rather have a Samsung device running Android M than any stock Android "letter" Q or whatever comes, because Samsung's software is always years ahead of the latest Android version. I can care less about the latest Android version, I just look forward to the new software features Samsung brings with the updates. Google's versions are just meh..
chanchan05
Q&A Team
- Nov 22, 2014
- 8,519
- 2
- 0
Dude have you seen the contents of the Android Q feature list? It's almost like, hey Samsung did this in Oreo and Pie, let's copy it for Android Q.
Plus Samsung flagships get 2 OS updates and 3 years security updates. Not one year.
Plus Samsung flagships get 2 OS updates and 3 years security updates. Not one year.
Gayle Lynn
Well-known member
- Jun 20, 2016
- 1,780
- 0
- 0
jimd1050
Champion
- Dec 14, 2011
- 3,246
- 16
- 38
Just like Google owned/made the Nexus line, (who always got the first OS updates) they make the Pixel - they will ALWAYS be the first to get the new OS! It's NOT Samsung's fault... look around at the other manufacturers - they're not getting it either, are they Eri_cx? Just Google Pixel!
TECHNICALLY no devices "in the wild" are getting Q yet, it's still an internal development build. There's an ever-growing list of devices that have Pie in full release now, with Samsung just trickling into that party...
L0n3N1nja
Well-known member
- Jan 11, 2014
- 3,628
- 5
- 0
Samsung's software is so much better than stock Android I couldn't care less it takes them time to update it. Most new Android features Pixel users look forward to are usually already on my phone, I really don't see what I'm missing out on.
I get monthly security updates, that is what matters to me, not Google's attempt to play catch up to Android OEMs.
I get monthly security updates, that is what matters to me, not Google's attempt to play catch up to Android OEMs.
Can't believe I'm actually defending Samsung on this one but they've been quite good releasing security patches - and they've even pulled ahead of some of the competitors when it comes to pie. Both of which is very unlike the Samsung of old.
Having a Pixel 3XL and the Note 9: I love the Google experience, but not necessarily because of pie. There's almost zero difference between 8.1 and Pie when it comes to overall functionality. Going between the Pixel and the Note is completely seamless, although they run different versions of Android at the moment. The Pixel 3 runs standard Android but in terms of gesture control and the launcher on top of it, it feels almost as heavily modified as the Samsung line now. Not really sure what pure Android means anymore.
Anyway, Android 10 won't be released until the second half of the year, so I'm most definitely not worrying about falling behind update wise at the moment. The Note will have Pie in a few weeks, and it'll be as up to date as any regular Pixel right now. And more than likely, it'll also get Android 10 a few months after the official release.
Having a Pixel 3XL and the Note 9: I love the Google experience, but not necessarily because of pie. There's almost zero difference between 8.1 and Pie when it comes to overall functionality. Going between the Pixel and the Note is completely seamless, although they run different versions of Android at the moment. The Pixel 3 runs standard Android but in terms of gesture control and the launcher on top of it, it feels almost as heavily modified as the Samsung line now. Not really sure what pure Android means anymore.
Anyway, Android 10 won't be released until the second half of the year, so I'm most definitely not worrying about falling behind update wise at the moment. The Note will have Pie in a few weeks, and it'll be as up to date as any regular Pixel right now. And more than likely, it'll also get Android 10 a few months after the official release.
jimd1050
Champion
- Dec 14, 2011
- 3,246
- 16
- 38
I definitely have to agree with you there - this past year, they've really changed on the security updates - they may be a few weeks behind but it's better than several months like they used to be (and only 2 or 3 per year). Big difference - kudos Samsung!
- Nov 16, 2010
- 17,654
- 215
- 0
What Android features (not Google features) are you looking for with the Pie update?
Rukbat
Retired Moderator
- Feb 12, 2012
- 44,532
- 46
- 48
Just a couple of comments:
1, Google releases updates to the manufacturers a month before they're released to Google phone (Nexus, Pixel) owners - so that the manufacturers have the time to add the vendor portion of Android and still release when Google does. But that takes developers, and good developers cost money. So some manufacturers (I'm looking at you, Samsung) only release updates a few times a year.
2. Beta releases (I know, this wasn't one) aren't so that you can get the new version ahead of everyone else. That's how they're used by most people, but if there were absolutely no bugs, it wouldn't be a beta, it wouldn't even be a release candidate, it would be the final version (of that version of Android). The whole reason for releasing betas is for those who want to (and don't use that phone as their daily driver) can download the beta and pound on it, trying to get it to crash - and reporting the problems back to Google, so they can fix that problem for the next beta version (or, at the end, for the final release).
But people install betas, then come here to complain about, or ask about, "this bug they're getting". We don't write Android, Google does. If you're going to beta test, report bugs to Google. And if you don't want a phone that crashes just as you call 911. don't install beta versions. I have one phone. I'm 76, so who knows if I'll need to call 911. I was in the business for almost half a century before I retired. I've released betas. (I've released alpha test versions too. Those are the ones that come with the tag that says "please keep track of what you were doing, so that when it crashes - and it will, big time - I can duplicate the cause of the crash".) But install a beta? No thank you. I'd rather have an 11 month old version that works than a brand new, not yet released, version that may not when I want, or need, it to.
1, Google releases updates to the manufacturers a month before they're released to Google phone (Nexus, Pixel) owners - so that the manufacturers have the time to add the vendor portion of Android and still release when Google does. But that takes developers, and good developers cost money. So some manufacturers (I'm looking at you, Samsung) only release updates a few times a year.
2. Beta releases (I know, this wasn't one) aren't so that you can get the new version ahead of everyone else. That's how they're used by most people, but if there were absolutely no bugs, it wouldn't be a beta, it wouldn't even be a release candidate, it would be the final version (of that version of Android). The whole reason for releasing betas is for those who want to (and don't use that phone as their daily driver) can download the beta and pound on it, trying to get it to crash - and reporting the problems back to Google, so they can fix that problem for the next beta version (or, at the end, for the final release).
But people install betas, then come here to complain about, or ask about, "this bug they're getting". We don't write Android, Google does. If you're going to beta test, report bugs to Google. And if you don't want a phone that crashes just as you call 911. don't install beta versions. I have one phone. I'm 76, so who knows if I'll need to call 911. I was in the business for almost half a century before I retired. I've released betas. (I've released alpha test versions too. Those are the ones that come with the tag that says "please keep track of what you were doing, so that when it crashes - and it will, big time - I can duplicate the cause of the crash".) But install a beta? No thank you. I'd rather have an 11 month old version that works than a brand new, not yet released, version that may not when I want, or need, it to.
Similar threads
Trending Posts
-
-
Is it me or am I the only who misses features of old?- Started by PixelMike89
- Replies: 16
-
Android 17 Beta- Started by YankInDaSouth
- Replies: 47
-
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram